Progressive Death Agenda Progresses

Right now, in the aftermath of the Hobby Lobby decision and Obama HHS mandate, we’re witnessing another crucial evolutionary stage in the progressive movement’s ever-changing and forward-advancing embrace of the abortion culture.In 2010, I wrote a piece for American Thinker titled, “Progressive Death.” What I laid out needs to be reiterated and updated. Unfortunately, it will need to be regularly reiterated and updated in the years ahead. Back in 2010, I underscored the core problem with progressives and their movement, particularly when applied to issues of unborn human life, where the problem becomes a catastrophe. Bear with me as I excerpt my original words:

One of the only things we really know about progressives, and that they know about themselves and their ideology, is that they favor constant “change,” “reform,” an ever-shifting, ongoing “evolution,” or, yes, progression. And therein is an inherent, significant difficulty: progressivism offers no clear, definable end….

For the rest of us, this ambiguity is troubling bordering on maddening, as we can’t, by the very nature of progressivism, get an answer from progressives as to where, exactly, they intend to stop…. [But] here’s where the confusion has the potential to become downright destructive: think about the consequences of their philosophy when applied to the very life and culture of America:

But what about abortion?... Planned Parenthood’s progressives weren’t there yet; they had to warm up to that.

It will shock pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike to hear this, but Margaret Sanger initially denounced abortion. “It is an alternative that I cannot too strongly condemn,” wrote Sanger in the January 27, 1932 edition of The Nation, “[S]ome ill-informed persons have the notion that when we speak of birth control we include abortion as a method. We certainly do not.”

Nonetheless, for these progressives, what began as birth control and eugenics -- aimed at halting life at conception -- needed only a few decades to snuff out life after conception.

As with much of what progressives do, where they started wasn’t enough. And, naturally, once legalized abortion came along, it, too, was not enough. Today, progressives tell us abortion should be funded by taxpayers….

Still, that, likewise, will not be enough. What might be next in the progression?...

It serves us all -- including unborn future generations -- to want answers to some hard questions as far as ultimate objectives are concerned. I sincerely beg progressives for some contours, a vague estimate: Could you please, this time around -- where human life is concerned -- establish some boundaries, set an end-goal or two, offer an inkling of predictability, a modicum of expectation, some flicker of a suggestion as to where you want to take us?

Unfortunately, they can’t, as such is the crux of their ever-changing philosophy. And that’s quite disconcerting, authorized by millions of Americans who blindly voted for “change.”

I wrote that four years ago. In light of progressives’ genuinely scary reaction to the Hobby Lobby decision, it’s time to update.

Just 20 years ago, it was unthinkable that an overwhelming consensus of progressives/liberals would compel everyone, including conscientious objectors invoking their sacred First Amendment religious freedoms, to forcibly pay for others’ contraception, sterilization services, and drugs that induce abortions. My “pro-choice” liberal friends assured me they’d never be so rude and crude as to consider asking me to pay for their abortions. That would be completely over the line. And to pay for their contraception, too? No way! they scoffed. Please, that would be beyond ridiculous. They merely wanted me “out of their bedroom” and to allow them their “safe, legal, and rare” abortions.

To repeat: They would never ask me to pay for their abortions and contraception. It was unimaginable. They were liberals, after all. They believed in freedom and tolerance. They would never be so “fascistic.”

Well, here we are, 2014, and the unfathomable is now the unwavering position of liberals/progressives.

How did they change so much so fast? The short answer is that they had to progress, to evolve to this more enlightened understanding. As for those of us who haven’t changed, who once shared the same position as these liberals/progressives, we are now deemed the extremists, the intransigents. We’re said to favor a “war on women.” In pleading with liberals/progressives to not force us to violate our most sacred beliefs on human life by subsidizing their abortions, we’re told that we’re “imposing” our religious beliefs, and also “denying” women the contraceptives they remain fully free to purchase with their own money.

To say this is frustrating is insufficient. Liberals already have everything they demanded on abortion. And yet, that’s not enough. For the left, it’s never enough. Today’s leftists want you to be party to their abortions, to enlist you in their behavior, even if you and your faith consider the behavior gravely sinful. They don’t give a damn. If you beg not to pay for their abortions, they will raise hell, calling you nasty names and accusing you (not them) of hatred and destruction.

Alas, this is where progressives have progressed on unborn life. It’s the next stage. It is, yet again, predictably, a stage that furthers death. It uses force not only against the victims, the unborn, but against those pleading not to be party to the victims’ destruction.

Again, all that we really know about progressives, and that they know about themselves, is that they’re always changing. Because of that, neither we nor they can tell us where they will stand on issues X and Y in 20 years. We can’t know because they don’t know. They’ll tell us when they get there.

But we do know this much: what’s seemingly inconceivable to all of us right now -- including to progressives themselves -- may become the dogmatic position of progressives in a generation. The once-inconceivable absurdities become reality, and when they do, the progressive shrugs and then shouts -- at you. If you suggest that a certain insane position might become progressives’ position in, say, the year 2034, they will scoff that you’re crazy, insisting they could never hold such an intolerable position. Alas, when they arrive at that position in 2034, they’ll tell you that you are the crazy one; more than that, you are the vile extremist for disagreeing with their newfound position. And they will attempt to force your compliance under the coercive power of the state.

When it comes to these vital matters of literal life and death, the ongoing progressive evolution is proving not just frightening but deadly. This is truly scary. Where will progressives be 20 years from now? Where will death’s progress advance next? Stay tuned.

Right now, in the aftermath of the Hobby Lobby decision and Obama HHS mandate, we’re witnessing another crucial evolutionary stage in the progressive movement’s ever-changing and forward-advancing embrace of the abortion culture.

In 2010, I wrote a piece for American Thinker titled, “Progressive Death.” What I laid out needs to be reiterated and updated. Unfortunately, it will need to be regularly reiterated and updated in the years ahead. Back in 2010, I underscored the core problem with progressives and their movement, particularly when applied to issues of unborn human life, where the problem becomes a catastrophe. Bear with me as I excerpt my original words:

One of the only things we really know about progressives, and that they know about themselves and their ideology, is that they favor constant “change,” “reform,” an ever-shifting, ongoing “evolution,” or, yes, progression. And therein is an inherent, significant difficulty: progressivism offers no clear, definable end….

For the rest of us, this ambiguity is troubling bordering on maddening, as we can’t, by the very nature of progressivism, get an answer from progressives as to where, exactly, they intend to stop…. [But] here’s where the confusion has the potential to become downright destructive: think about the consequences of their philosophy when applied to the very life and culture of America:

But what about abortion?... Planned Parenthood’s progressives weren’t there yet; they had to warm up to that.

It will shock pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike to hear this, but Margaret Sanger initially denounced abortion. “It is an alternative that I cannot too strongly condemn,” wrote Sanger in the January 27, 1932 edition of The Nation, “[S]ome ill-informed persons have the notion that when we speak of birth control we include abortion as a method. We certainly do not.”

Nonetheless, for these progressives, what began as birth control and eugenics -- aimed at halting life at conception -- needed only a few decades to snuff out life after conception.

As with much of what progressives do, where they started wasn’t enough. And, naturally, once legalized abortion came along, it, too, was not enough. Today, progressives tell us abortion should be funded by taxpayers….

Still, that, likewise, will not be enough. What might be next in the progression?...

It serves us all -- including unborn future generations -- to want answers to some hard questions as far as ultimate objectives are concerned. I sincerely beg progressives for some contours, a vague estimate: Could you please, this time around -- where human life is concerned -- establish some boundaries, set an end-goal or two, offer an inkling of predictability, a modicum of expectation, some flicker of a suggestion as to where you want to take us?

Unfortunately, they can’t, as such is the crux of their ever-changing philosophy. And that’s quite disconcerting, authorized by millions of Americans who blindly voted for “change.”

I wrote that four years ago. In light of progressives’ genuinely scary reaction to the Hobby Lobby decision, it’s time to update.

Just 20 years ago, it was unthinkable that an overwhelming consensus of progressives/liberals would compel everyone, including conscientious objectors invoking their sacred First Amendment religious freedoms, to forcibly pay for others’ contraception, sterilization services, and drugs that induce abortions. My “pro-choice” liberal friends assured me they’d never be so rude and crude as to consider asking me to pay for their abortions. That would be completely over the line. And to pay for their contraception, too? No way! they scoffed. Please, that would be beyond ridiculous. They merely wanted me “out of their bedroom” and to allow them their “safe, legal, and rare” abortions.

To repeat: They would never ask me to pay for their abortions and contraception. It was unimaginable. They were liberals, after all. They believed in freedom and tolerance. They would never be so “fascistic.”

Well, here we are, 2014, and the unfathomable is now the unwavering position of liberals/progressives.

How did they change so much so fast? The short answer is that they had to progress, to evolve to this more enlightened understanding. As for those of us who haven’t changed, who once shared the same position as these liberals/progressives, we are now deemed the extremists, the intransigents. We’re said to favor a “war on women.” In pleading with liberals/progressives to not force us to violate our most sacred beliefs on human life by subsidizing their abortions, we’re told that we’re “imposing” our religious beliefs, and also “denying” women the contraceptives they remain fully free to purchase with their own money.

To say this is frustrating is insufficient. Liberals already have everything they demanded on abortion. And yet, that’s not enough. For the left, it’s never enough. Today’s leftists want you to be party to their abortions, to enlist you in their behavior, even if you and your faith consider the behavior gravely sinful. They don’t give a damn. If you beg not to pay for their abortions, they will raise hell, calling you nasty names and accusing you (not them) of hatred and destruction.

Alas, this is where progressives have progressed on unborn life. It’s the next stage. It is, yet again, predictably, a stage that furthers death. It uses force not only against the victims, the unborn, but against those pleading not to be party to the victims’ destruction.

Again, all that we really know about progressives, and that they know about themselves, is that they’re always changing. Because of that, neither we nor they can tell us where they will stand on issues X and Y in 20 years. We can’t know because they don’t know. They’ll tell us when they get there.

But we do know this much: what’s seemingly inconceivable to all of us right now -- including to progressives themselves -- may become the dogmatic position of progressives in a generation. The once-inconceivable absurdities become reality, and when they do, the progressive shrugs and then shouts -- at you. If you suggest that a certain insane position might become progressives’ position in, say, the year 2034, they will scoff that you’re crazy, insisting they could never hold such an intolerable position. Alas, when they arrive at that position in 2034, they’ll tell you that you are the crazy one; more than that, you are the vile extremist for disagreeing with their newfound position. And they will attempt to force your compliance under the coercive power of the state.

When it comes to these vital matters of literal life and death, the ongoing progressive evolution is proving not just frightening but deadly. This is truly scary. Where will progressives be 20 years from now? Where will death’s progress advance next? Stay tuned.